General Chat Thread, Back to not being able to afford one.... in General; Originally Posted by chrbb
Sorry if daft question but have you tried putting in a low offer on one of ...
29th January 2010, 10:52 AM #16
Originally Posted by chrbb
This was the advice i got and it seems to work. I also used Zoopla to have a snoop at what everyone else paid for there houses.
Mine was originally on the market for 100k but they accepted an offer of 91.5 with 2k cashback option. The 2k has been taken off the deposit meaning i only needed to stump up 8.
IDG Tech News
29th January 2010, 10:54 AM #17
i did put one or two lower offers in last year, but the sellers were somewhat obdurate...i don't have a house to sell and have a larged deposit but i'm competing against cash buyers and people with big deposits [from mum and dad or years of saving]. In a lot of cases there's no pressure to sell......the one's that have gone SSTC i suspect have been sold for around 95% of the asking price.
Originally Posted by chrbb
Your absolutely right though, i think my best best is a quick sale, one of......death, divorce or care home move. Not that many repo's coming on, but a death or relocation sale might make the vendor more liable to accept a lower offer. That seemed to be the case back in the first of half of 2009. I think the other poster had the right idea in buing 9 months ago....
I just wish there were a few more forced sales, i think the market needs these but they don't look likely.....at the moment it's disproportionately weighted in favour of the sellers. that's just my opinion form following my local market.
29th January 2010, 11:01 AM #18
My 1 bed flat cost me 105k two years ago, at the time I was on Technician Wages, Now i'm NM it's ok, but thankfully I inherited an amount good enough to be a deposit.
I live about 10 miles from Bath
Sadly, I think most of us will be hoping for our parents to leave us something before we can own a house.
29th January 2010, 11:13 AM #19
They will not rise too much unless people can afford to buy them. So i do not believe the artical.
I think the majority of people being accepted for a mortgage are to do with these goverment schemes.
House prices are still way to high compared to what people get paid. Something has got to give.
29th January 2010, 11:17 AM #20
Not necessarily. There's the potential for a vicious circle.
Originally Posted by Quackers
Person owns two houses, rents one, but pays their living expenses by still working full time.
Rent builds up, person uses it to put a deposit down to buy another house - uses the rent from the first to pay the mortgage.
Rent builds up more, with both sets going to pay off the mortgage, and buy a third house.
So basically those who own enough property to rent it out could potentially keep prices high enough that those who simply want to buy a house to live in, instead have to rent from them.
I'm far from an economist so I'm sure there's some problem with this model, but it still worries me.
29th January 2010, 11:39 AM #21
I'll tell you what has to give. MP's being able to rent out their houses. Why else has nothing been done about it yet? Pigs and Troughs that's why. It's not in their interest.
Originally Posted by jinnantonnix
I have no problem with the idea of there being landlords, as there will always be people that will never be able to afford to purchase a house, but thanks to Liebour and Mr Brown raiding private pension funds, every man and his Dog suddenly took it upon themselves to become landlords.
Fine for the baby boom generation, but for the majority under 30 (and some above) we have been royally shafted, and we shouldn't put up with it.
29th January 2010, 11:44 AM #22
Have you looked at any of the government schemes?
I've just bought a house on a scheme called New Build Homebuy. Basically you buy a percentage and rent the rest (at pretty good rates).
I got a brand new house priced at £165,000 which is reasonable in this area, and I pay about £300 mortgage and £200 rent. I own 25% of the house, but can increase the percentage at any time. Obviously if you do that then the mortgage goes up and the rent goes down.
I only had to find a 10% deposit on 25% of the value so £4125.
I think this is a good way to start if you are a first time buyer. I could afford this on a single wage although I am a network manager.
29th January 2010, 11:47 AM #23
i think you've just discovered buy-to-let.
Originally Posted by jamesb
the only problem in that example, is the current BTL mortgage requirements of having a 25% deposit.
Part of the reason for the massive explosion in BTL has been the non-requirement for putting down large amounts of cash, being able to buy with little or no money down.
IF that comes back in a big way, banks and borrowers encouraged by rising prices for instance, then watch out below....
the more traditional investor/landlord with a few properties here and there.....they didn't get where they are by paying silly money for houses. they leave that to mr and mrs dual income no kids or the noob BTL investor [who the banks aren't falling over themesleves to lend to at the minute]. but yes, they too have more properties than they strictly need which mean less property available for sale.
29th January 2010, 12:01 PM #24
By somabc in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
Last Post: 16th March 2010, 11:33 AM
By Hamzah in forum Windows
Last Post: 17th October 2008, 06:31 PM
By sharkster in forum General Chat
Last Post: 7th June 2008, 11:30 AM
By davyboi in forum General Chat
Last Post: 9th January 2008, 02:48 PM
By russdev in forum General EduGeek News/Announcements
Last Post: 21st September 2006, 12:46 PM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)